Pakistan is a land of many incongruities. The military, and to a lesser extent the civil bureaucracy, wield power but lack foresight and public support. The politicians who enjoy popular backing do not always have power, which limits their experience in governance. Intellectuals and professionals articulate a vision for their country but lack the stamina for politics.

The result is constant experimentation with the system and form of government instead of moving forward on the basis of a clearly defined constitutional pattern. After eight years of military rule that began with promises of “setting things right once and for all,” Pakistan is once again at a crossroads.

Recently, General Pervez Musharraf joined opposition leader Benazir Bhutto in agreeing to an arrangement that could help bridge the traditional divide between the military-dominated establishment and populist politicians. But the B-grade politicians who have benefited from becoming the civilian face of military rule are already screaming at the top of their lungs to preempt a break from past precedent.

Professionals, such as banker Shaukat Aziz, who have ended up in positions that should normally go to elected politicians are also uneasy about a new order that could result in their relinquishing high office.

Then there are the analysts and commentators who insist on drawing the wrong conclusions from the tragedy of Pakistan’s fourth military regime. Some of them are now openly calling for another military intervention to complete what, in their view, could not be completed by generals Ayub Khan, Yahya Khan, Zia ul Haq and Pervez Musharraf.

... contd.